Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sada Ram & Others vs N.T.P.C. Ltd. & Others on 7 January, 2021
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
SHIMLA
RFA No.363 of 2015 alongwith RFA Nos.364, 365, 366,
367. 472. 493 of 2015 127 of 2016.
Date of decision: 07.01.2021
.
1. RFA No.363 of 2015
Sada Ram & Others ... ...Appellants
Versus
N.T.P.C. Ltd. & Others ... ...Respondents
2. RFA No.364 of 2015
Bhagat Ram & Others ... ...Appellants
Versus
N.T.P.C. Ltd. & Others ... ...Respondents
3. RFA No.365 of 2015
Babau Ram & Others ... ...Appellants
Versus
N.T.P.C. Ltd. & Others
r ... ...Respondents
4. RFA No.366 of 2015
Follan & Others ... ...Appellants
Versus
N.T.P.C. Ltd. & Others ... ...Respondents
5. RFA No.367 of 2015
Rajesh Kumar & Others ... ...Appellants
Versus
N.T.P.C. Ltd. & Others ... ...Respondents
6. RFA No.472 of 2015
Ajay Kumar & Others ... ...Appellants
Versus
N.T.P.C. Ltd. & Others ... ...Respondents
7. RFA No.493 of 2015
Chet Ram through LRs Ravi Dass & Others ... ...Appellants
Versus
N.T.P.C. Ltd. & Others ... ...Respondents
8. RFA No.127 of 2016
Ravi Dass & Another ... ...Appellants
Versus
N.T.P.C. Ltd. & Others ... ...Respondents
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Sandeep Sharma,Judge.
Whether approved for reporting ?1
1
Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 08/01/2021 20:16:04 :::HCHP
2
For the Appellant(s): Ms.Veena Sharma and Mr.Abhishek
Sharma, Advocates.
For Respondents 1 : Mr.Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate
with Ms.Rinki Kashmiri, Advocate.
For Respondent No.2: Mr.Sudhir Bhatnagar, Additional
Advocate General.
.
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING
Sandeep Sharma,J.
Since all the above captioned appeals are
directed against the award dated 02.06.2014 passed by
learned District Judge, Bilaspur, same are being taken
up together for adjudication with the consent of learned
counsel representing the parties.
2.
By way of aforesaid appeals filed under
Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter
referred to as the Act), challenge has been laid to award
dated 02.06.2014 passed by learned District Judge,
Bilaspur, in various Land Reference petitions as
described in the award.
3. Undisputedly, the suit land belonging to
claimants, situate in village Bohat, Tehsil Sadar, District
Bilaspur, H.P. came to be acquired for public purpose;
namely; construction of Kol Dam Hydro Electric Project
and acquisition proceedings commenced with the
issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Act on
06.10.2000. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short
'LAC') passed award No.46 of 2005 on 01.12.2005. It is
not in dispute that market value of acquired land came
to be determined/assessed on different rates,
.
classification/ category-wise, ranging from
Rs.1,04,416/- to Rs.4,69,955/- per bigha.
4. Claimants, being aggrieved and dissatisfied
with the amount awarded by LAC, preferred reference
petitions under Section 18 of the Act, seeking therein
enhancement of compensation, however, fact remains
that vide impugned award dated 02.06.2014 learned
District Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. rejected the claim put
forth by claimants for enhancement of compensation.
5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
rejection of their claims for enhancement of original
award passed by LAC vide award No.46 of 2005, dated
01.12.2005, claimants have approached this Court in
the instant proceedings, laying therein challenge to
award dated 02.06.2014, passed by learned District
Judge, Bilaspur in the petitions having been filed under
Section 18 of the Act.
6. It is not in dispute before this Court that
similar situate claimants, whose land also came to be
acquired for construction of Kol Dam in the acquisition
proceedings commenced with the publication of
Notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on
06.10.2000, had filed land reference petitions before the
learned District Judge, Bilaspur, praying therein to
.
enhance the compensation awarded by LAC vide award
No.46 of 2005, dated 01.12.2005.
7. As has been noticed above, LAC, while
passing award No.46 of 2005, dated 01.12.2005,
determined the market value of acquired land on
different rates, classification/category-wise, ranging
from Rs.1,04,416/-
r to Rs.4,69,955/- per bigha.
However, fact remains that similar situated claimants,
being dissatisfied with quantum of compensation
awarded by LAC in its award No.46 of 2005, dated
01.12.2005, filed reference petitions under Section 18 of
the Act and those reference petitions were clubbed and
disposed of by a common award passed in Reference
Petition No.173 of 2008, titled as: Kanchan Kumari
vs. Land Acquisition Collector, Kol Dam, Bilaspur and &
Another, wherein the Reference Court re-determined the
market value of entire land irrespective of its
category/classification on uniform basis and awarded a
sum of Rs.4,69,955/- per bigha.
8. Being aggrieved and dis-satisfied with the
aforesaid award passed by learned District Judge,
Bilaspur, respondent No.2 - N.T.P.C. filed RFA No.4180
of 2013 a/w Cross Objection No.5 of 2017, titled as:
NTPC Limited Kol Dam, Barmana vs. Kanchan Kumari &
.
Others, in this Court.
9. A Coordinate Bench of this Court vide
judgment dated 11.01.2017, passed in aforesaid RFA
No.4180 of 2013, upheld the award dated 27.08.2013
passed by learned District Judge, Bilaspur in the
aforesaid Reference Petition No.173 of 2008, titled
as: Kanchan Kumari vs. Land Acquisition Collector, Kol
Dam, Bilaspur and & Another and reiterated the market
value of entire acquired land irrespective of its category
and classification as done by Reference Court.
10. Ms.Veena Sharma, learned counsel
representing the appellants, while placing reliance upon
the aforesaid judgment dated 11.1.2017, passed in RFA
No.4180 of 2013, by the Coordinate Bench of this Court,
contended that the appeals at hand also deserve to be
disposed of in terms of aforesaid judgment because
undisputedly claimants in the cases at hand alongwith
the claimants who had filed Reference Petition No.173
of 2008, titled as: Kanchan Kumari vs. Land
Acquisition Collector, Kol Dam, Bilaspur and & Another,
were awarded compensation vide common award No.46
of 2005. She further argued that since this Court had
upheld the findings of Reference Court, returned in the
aforesaid Reference Petition No.173/2008, therefore, the
.
claimants in the instant cases are also entitled to
market value of entire acquired land irrespective of its
category/classifications by uniformly awarding a highest
sum of Rs.4,69,955/- per bigha.
11. Mr.Neeraj Gupta, learned counsel
representing respondent No.1, while fairly
acknowledging the factum with regard to passing of
judgment dated 11.01.2017 in RFA No.4180 of 2013,
conceded that claimants in the cases at hand are also
entitled to market value of acquired land @
Rs.4,69,955/- per bigha, which is highest rate awarded
by the Collector and affirmed by the learned District
Judge, Bilaspur in Reference Petition No.173 of 2008,
titled as: Kanchan Kumari vs. Land Acquisition
Collector, Kol Dam, Bilaspur and & Another, which has
further been upheld by this Court in RFA No.4180 of
2013.
12. Consequently, in view of aforesaid discussion
as well as fair stand adopted by Ms.Veena Sharma,
learned counsel representing the appellants, all the
present appeals are disposed of and it is ordered that
directions contained in RFA No.4180 of 2013 a/w Cross
Objection No.5 of 2017, titled as: NTPC Limited Kol
Dam, Barmana vs. Kanchan Kumari & Others, shall
.
mutatis mutandis apply to the present cases also.
13. Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit the
entire award amount in the Registry of this Court within
a period of eight weeks from today.
14. Interim order, if any, is vacated. All the
miscellaneous applications are disposed of.
January 7, 2021 (Sandeep Sharma)
(aks) Judge
